Urgent Q: Summilux 35 pre-ASPH - Goggles don't show infinity focus

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Sorry for the "urgent" topic title: I've just received a Summilux 35 pre-ASPH v2 — the version with goggles (for the M3); it's black (Canadian) and has the 12504 lens hood and an infinity lock.

 

The goggles don't show the rangefinder patch aligning properly at infinity focus, and for near focus the goggles show vertical misaligned of the rangefinder patch. I tested this on three cameras: the M10, M3 and M6, all of which have properly aligned rangefinders. 

 

I had time only to make some test shots at f/1.4 and f/4. It was impossible to hit proper focus at infinity at f/1.4. On near focus (0.65-2m), the vertical misaligned shown through the goggles made it hitting proper focus somewhat random.

 

How serious is the alignment problem of the goggles? Also, I'm leaving the States in mid-September for Paris for one month before proceeding to Bangkok for 6 months. There's an excellent Leica lens repair technician in Bangkok. Would he easily be able to fix this?

 

There's another, at least potential, problem: the front lens assembly has some small amount of play: it can be jiggled a tiny amount when handling the lens — one can hear the play. I assume this would be easy to fix.

 

So, the final question is, should I keep or return the lens to the seller?

_________________

Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

[Guest]

Anyone here with experience on the goggle alignment problem? I must write to the seller in about two hours...and decide whether to return the lens.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[jaapv]

Call Don Goldberg (DAG) and ask.

[a.noctilux]

Sorry for late reply.

 

It seems that your lens has two distinct troubles.

 

At one point for goggles, the fix may be simple or impossible: align two prisms together.

In past time, I had one 35mm with goggles that would not "align perfectly", but some others could be fixed.

 

Another adventure with goggles, it may be mis-align quite easily.

Now I prefer if possible, same lens without goggles ("M2 type"), but not "M3 type goggles-removed", of course.

 

The in-lens rattle is another trouble...

For that alone, I would return the lens.

Edited August 22, 2017 by a.noctilux

[luigi bertolotti]

My quick opinion is that maybe is better to return the item... the infinity issue probably can be fixed rather easily by a good technician... but the vertical misalignement is imho more problematic, because it probably has to do with the goggles in themselves... not an easy sub-assembly to manage, even if spares maybe still do exist somewhere...

The front rattle also can be not difficult to fix... but it can be also a minor issue : I have a very old ungoggled chrome Summilux (first batch) which has a minimal play of the front... I keep and use it as is with no problem.

Edited August 23, 2017 by luigi bertolotti

[Guest]

Now, I have to think about whether to search for another one, and if so, whether is should be a v.1 versus a v.2 Summilux 35. I decided to buy the lens after looking a a 35 page thread on RFF that has some wonderful photographs, particularly at f/1.4 shooting into the light or with strong side light, mainly B&W and color. From these shots it's clear that the results are contingent on the nature of the flare of this lens. Some of the photographers argue that the v.1 is "much better", although I don't see that from the pictures that are often wonderful from v.2 as well.

 

My interest in the lens, was to shoot it mostly at f/1.4, at least initially, with the M3 and sometimes with the M10. I terms of aesthetics, I was interested in starting a project with a look related to some of the work of Michael Ackerman. 

 

In testing the lens I returned, I did get the look I was interested in some of the pictures, when the focus issues I mentioned above did not interfere. As for the handling of the lens, the goggles seemed to darken the viewfinder image substantially and the handling in terms of rather fiddly access to the focus ring with the 12504 hood was somewhat fiddle. Nevertheless, this should not be a problem if I shot it without changing aperture often.

 

I have a Summilux 35 FLE that I rarely shot at f/1.4, but I did yesterday for some 30 test shots with the M10, and I'm still thinking looking at the results in terms whether should forget about the pre-ASPH/goggle version. On the other hand, I also have a Summicorn 35v4 that I might sell if it turns out that the Summilux 35 pre-ASPH has similar results at apertures of f/2 and smaller.

 

So, any thoughts on all this, and on v.1 vs v.2?

 

I should add that I would go for the goggle version because I want a lens with less than a 1m minimum focus.

_________________

Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine

Edited August 24, 2017 by Guest

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't answer all of your questioning, but only relate my experiences.

 

- with goggles, the finder not only is dimmer but also lack of contrast to focus confortably with plenty of flare with "night light"

 

- this may "help to see" what the pictures would look like (at f/1.4 the flare can be used to enhance the picture as you know already)

 

- focussing to 65cm can be handy if need be but in my practice, less than 1% of my photos are less than one meter so the "M2 type" is fine for me

 

- using also some 35 Summicron ( version 1 to 4 ) I must admit that those f/2 photos are lovely with some flare for V1

- I have heard that someone (may it be me ? ) said that 35mm Summilux-M pre-asph. is like a 35mm Summicron with same size/weight with "overdrive to f/1.4" if need be

- my 35mm Summilux-M pre-asph has curve field (more than Summicron) that can be annoying in day light photo (at f/5.6) to compose large dof in image

[TomB_tx]

I have a goggled 35 Summicron that was also off when I received it, but had DAG fix it during a CLA. It's been fine since then. However, goggled lenses do affect the viewfinder contrast, flare, etc. - so I much rather use a non-goggled 35 on an M2 than use a 35 on my M3. My v1 35 Summicron is otherwise quite nice, but I refer the images from my 35 Summaron 2.8.

The 35 lens I used for 40 years is a v2 Summicron from 1969, and considering most of the opinions I read about that lens, perhaps I'm not very discerning.

[Guest]

...focussing to 65cm can be handy if need be but in my practice, less than 1% of my photos are less than one meter so the "M2 type" is fine for me...

 

While almost never focusing to 0.7 meters, I do take a lot of pictures at 1m or a bit further. Having the ability to go down to 0.65 or 0.7 is useful because otherwise one has to move the camera back and forth when close to 1m, which can be problematic in a dynamic situation. That's the reason I've been interested in the goggle version.

Edited August 24, 2017 by Guest